• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

When does trophy hunting become too much for most?

littlebeast said:
i, for one appreciate your perspective. that said, what i think you fail to address is the ‘rare’ aspect. it’s one thing to harvest among a healthy population. it’s quite another to take trophies among rare species that are on the brink of extinction. in that regard, there is no possible justification. it’s absolutely unconscionable - and there is no reasonable argument for it.

in any event, i still maintain my prior argument - that killing any living thing for sport is pure and unadulterated evil.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is most certainly a possible justification and a reasonable argument for it. vvv

bojangle said:
[YouTube]YUA8i5S0YMU[/YouTube]
Click to expand...
 
bojangle said:
Yes, there is most certainly a possible justification and a reasonable argument for it. vvv
Click to expand...
Kind of a twisted way to justify trophy hunting. I'll bet that if they put their mind to it, they could come up with a justification on how sexual predators who don't kill women are actually beneficial to women.

Regardless of the 'benefit' that they do, I don't have respect for most trophy hunters. Mounting heads on walls may be the pinnacle of some people's lives, but if that is the sole purpose of their hunting there isn't, IMHO, much to admire there.

I have no trouble with hunting for food. That is more honest than just picking up your meat in the grocery story, at least then you're confronting the actual 'reality' of that meat.

Now, go out and hunt wild boar with a spear or a bow and arrow....that's meeting them on a more level playing field. In those cases, you've earned the head you mounted on the wall and they had some chance of taking your hide.
 
littlebeast said:
i, for one appreciate your perspective. that said, what i think you fail to address is the ‘rare’ aspect. it’s one thing to harvest among a healthy population. it’s quite another to take trophies among rare species that are on the brink of extinction. in that regard, there is no possible justification. it’s absolutely unconscionable - and there is no reasonable argument for it.

in any event, i still maintain my prior argument - that killing any living thing for sport is pure and unadulterated evil.
Click to expand...

Maybe I can clarify something (I have never trophy hunted so consider that here), the actually killing part maybe isn't the focus of the trophy hunt, it's the acquiring of the animal as a trophy. People do it in other ways too, the "Trophy Wife" for example - different but in the mind of the doer I wonder how much different.

But let's say that the Trophy hunter takes the animal for the pure enjoyment of hanging some skull or hide on a wall, ghastly as that may seem they pay for it and often that isn't cheap so relatively few can afford it. Someone is making a profit on that and it's not the trophy hunter yet we heap the scorn upon them and almost nothing on the government which takes some of the money or the others who also get their palms greased.

Trophy hunters aren't generally causing the extinction of species, they happen to come in on the tail end of a long process that reduced the animal population to critical stages. Things have been set in motion that left to continue will surely guarantee extinction of certain animals. Why not let trophy hunter to what they do because as heinous a trade at least they pay for the dirty deed if we call it that. We can cast judgments on what they do but if some amount of what they pay goes to conserve the animals they hunt then aren't they doing far more than anyone else?
 
Last edited:
Well, it depends. I mean, the people I stuff and hang up as trophies in my basement are usually pretty fiesty and there is legitimate danger associated with capturing them. I don't understand trophy hunting animals you don't have sex with though.
 
Eldritch said:
Well, it depends. I mean, the people I stuff and hang up as trophies in my basement are usually pretty fiesty and there is legitimate danger associated with capturing them. I don't understand trophy hunting animals you don't have sex with though.
Click to expand...
Well, we all have our fetishes to feed. :laughing
 
Eldritch said:
Well, it depends. I mean, the people I stuff and hang up as trophies in my basement are usually pretty fiesty and there is legitimate danger associated with capturing them. I don't understand trophy hunting animals you don't have sex with though.
Click to expand...


Are you talking about sheep? Do tell.:laughing
 
littlebeast said:
i, for one appreciate your perspective. that said, what i think you fail to address is the ‘rare’ aspect. it’s one thing to harvest among a healthy population. it’s quite another to take trophies among rare species that are on the brink of extinction. in that regard, there is no possible justification. it’s absolutely unconscionable - and there is no reasonable argument for it.

in any event, i still maintain my prior argument - that killing any living thing for sport is pure and unadulterated evil.
Click to expand...

Except that, in this case, it was hunting (and the money that it generated) that saved the species from the brink of extinction.

I did misread your earlier post so thanks for clarifying that. I’m still confused though and maybe it’s our own connotations of “sport” that is causing that. Are hunters not supposed to enjoy the process at all or be proud of their achievements? People who spend weeks climbing all over the backcountry chasing and trying to outsmart their quarry when instead they could have just gone to Wendy’s are definitely participating in some form of sport. It’s a challenge of skill and endurance and strategy and luck. There’s a lot of fulfillment to be had even if the hunter strikes out, but they’re out there also to kill something. And most of them will take some part of the animal that isn’t edible as a trophy to remember the experience by. But that’s my ideal image of a hunter. Also commonly referred to as sportsmen.
 
CABilly said:
Except that, in this case, it was hunting (and the money that it generated) that saved the species from the brink of extinction.

I did misread your earlier post so thanks for clarifying that. I’m still confused though and maybe it’s our own connotations of “sport” that is causing that. Are hunters not supposed to enjoy the process at all or be proud of their achievements? People who spend weeks climbing all over the backcountry chasing and trying to outsmart their quarry when instead they could have just gone to Wendy’s are definitely participating in some form of sport. It’s a challenge of skill and endurance and strategy and luck. There’s a lot of fulfillment to be had even if the hunter strikes out, but they’re out there also to kill something. And most of them will take some part of the animal that isn’t edible as a trophy to remember the experience by. But that’s my ideal image of a hunter. Also commonly referred to as sportsmen.
Click to expand...
I think that there is a broad range of hunters, from the admirable to the disgusting. As with every other zone of human experience, you get all types across the whole spectrum.

I have come across hunters camps that have piles of garbage, non-biodegradable, including numerous beer bottles and/or cans in the pile, uncovered shit holes (latrines) and other impacts that will remain for years.

I've also come across camps that without extensive experience wouldn't be noticed by most and within a few months would be unrecognizable as a camp to almost anyone.

As with everything else, the realm of hunters include those to be admired and those to be disgusted by.
 
Climber said:
I think that there is a broad range of hunters, from the admirable to the disgusting. As with every other zone of human experience, you get all types across the whole spectrum.

I have come across hunters camps that have piles of garbage, non-biodegradable, including numerous beer bottles and/or cans in the pile, uncovered shit holes (latrines) and other impacts that will remain for years.

I've also come across camps that without extensive experience wouldn't be noticed by most and within a few months would be unrecognizable as a camp to almost anyone.

As with everything else, the realm of hunters include those to be admired and those to be disgusted by.
Click to expand...

This^

-----------------------------------------

We are all hunters, it all comes down to what you hunt. Gatherers are hunters too, its just a nice word for taking something that might not necessarily want to be taken.

Everything anyone has came to be because they either took it from someone else, paid to have it made which eventually caused someone to take it from something or something else. The further one is removed from the physical act of the taking the easier it is to find fault with those actually doing it. People hunt for shoes and take pleasure in scoping out a nice pair. Well, if they are made with leather some animal died to make that possible and somewhere along the line someone got right up front and killed that animal. Most likely that animal had no choice, no route of escape and no alternative from the day of their birth than to become the sole of the shoes you wear. Maybe its okay because it was a cow but then aren't there cultures where cows are revered? What would they say about your score?
 
Last edited:
CABilly said:
Except that, in this case, it was hunting (and the money that it generated) that saved the species from the brink of extinction.

I did misread your earlier post so thanks for clarifying that. I’m still confused though and maybe it’s our own connotations of “sport” that is causing that. Are hunters not supposed to enjoy the process at all or be proud of their achievements? People who spend weeks climbing all over the backcountry chasing and trying to outsmart their quarry when instead they could have just gone to Wendy’s are definitely participating in some form of sport. It’s a challenge of skill and endurance and strategy and luck. There’s a lot of fulfillment to be had even if the hunter strikes out, but they’re out there also to kill something. And most of them will take some part of the animal that isn’t edible as a trophy to remember the experience by. But that’s my ideal image of a hunter. Also commonly referred to as sportsmen.
Click to expand...

WRT trophy hunting as ‘saving the species from the brink of extinction’ - it’s a common arguement, and one that i find disingenuous and ironic. we are responsible for most (if not all) of the factors that threaten these species survival. our solution? kill some so the others can survive? combating destruction with more destruction makes zero sense to me, especially when trophy hunters (unlike natural predators) take the best specimens, the ones most essential to future breeding. it’s flawed logic. and unnatural further interference in the health of the population. IMO it’s killing for pleasure, plain and simple. which as i have said ad nauseam, i find disgusting.

will also add, and i have mentioned it on barf before, my first job was in a zoo. not that i like zoos in general, but this particular zoo was (is) renowned for its conservation efforts - particularly as relates to threatened and critically endangered species. i have enough first hand knowledge to support my arguments.

as an aside, i will also add that pleasure killing is extremely uncommon in the natural world. one large cat (the leopard) is a famous exception, and is well known to kill for pleasure. it is therefore considered one of the most dangerous animals, and a serious threat in the environments they inhabit. i consider humans who behave similarly to be an equally serious threat (more actually, if you consider that even a leopard would find it impossible to take down the best and strongest prey - you need a fucking gun for that). and i seriously don’t buy the excuses people are peddling for this sort of behavior.
 
Last edited:
Subsistence hunting is one thing. Killing something just to hang it's head on your wall is pretty fucked up imo. But, whatever gets your dick hard, I guess.
 
littlebeast said:
WRT trophy hunting as ‘saving the species from the brink of extinction’ - it’s a common arguement, and one that i find disingenuous and ironic. we are responsible for most (if not all) of the factors that threaten these species survival. our solution? kill some so the others can survive? combating destruction with more destruction makes zero sense to me, especially when trophy hunters (unlike natural predators) take the best specimens, the ones most essential to future breeding. it’s flawed logic. and unnatural further interference in the health of the population. IMO it’s killing for pleasure, plain and simple. which as i have said ad nauseam, i find disgusting.

will also add, and i have mentioned it on barf before, my first job was in a zoo. not that i like zoos in general, but this particular zoo was (is) renowned for its conservation efforts - particularly as relates to threatened and critically endangered species. i have enough first hand knowledge to support my arguments.

as an aside, i will also add that pleasure killing is extremely uncommon in the natural world. one large cat (the leopard) is a famous exception, and is well known to kill for pleasure. it is therefore considered one of the most dangerous animals, and a serious threat in the environments they inhabit. i consider humans who behave similarly to be an equally serious threat (more actually, if you consider that even a leopard would find it impossible to take down the best and strongest prey - you need a fucking gun for that). and i seriously don’t buy the excuses people are peddling for this sort of behavior.
Click to expand...

In a perfect world humans would exist in harmony with nature. But we don’t. We change the environment and fuck shit up. I don’t think it’s disingenuous to credit hunting with the rebounding of threatened animal populations. They were on their way out until hunters stepped up with money and conservation efforts. I guess if we want to be purists we could say it’d be fine for the locals to hunt animals into extinction to feed their growing populations and that would be better than rich outsiders paying for the privilege. But I don’t believe that.

People hunt mature animals with management in mind. The big mature male with the glorious horns had likely had plenty of time to spread his genes, and is also probably preventing younger males from spreading theirs. They may be shooting blanks. And the older they get, the harder life becomes. Eventually they will die in battle, fall to predation, or starve to death. The “trophy” animals are their own proof that they’ve lived a good life. They’re also hardest to kill because they’ve been around long enough to know how to survive. When considering wildlife management, we have to focus on populations, not individual animals.


I’m not trying to mansplain your feelings away, btw. I’m just offering a perspective from a hunter who deeply cares about conservation and the preservation of wildlife. I pay lots of money well beyond tag and license fees to do my part in funding wildlife and habitat conservation. I write my representatives to implore then to support conservation legislation. There are thousands more who are much more deeply involved than I am. I don’t think I’ll ever go on one of these exotic hunts (One time I sunk almost $5k into an African safari trip, only to walk away after reading more about it and deciding it wasn’t my style) Of course there are shitty people everywhere you go and in every corner you could look. But someone paying money to hunt an animal that had been identified by conservation directors as eligible to be culled without negative impact to the herd, and having the fees go toward further conservation efforts is to me a net positive.
 
CABilly said:
In a perfect world humans would exist in harmony with nature. But we don’t. We change the environment and fuck shit up. I don’t think it’s disingenuous to credit hunting with the rebounding of threatened animal populations. They were on their way out until hunters stepped up with money and conservation efforts. I guess if we want to be purists we could say it’d be fine for the locals to hunt animals into extinction to feed their growing populations and that would be better than rich outsiders paying for the privilege. But I don’t believe that.

People hunt mature animals with management in mind. The big mature male with the glorious horns had likely had plenty of time to spread his genes, and is also probably preventing younger males from spreading theirs. They may be shooting blanks. And the older they get, the harder life becomes. Eventually they will die in battle, fall to predation, or starve to death. The “trophy” animals are their own proof that they’ve lived a good life. They’re also hardest to kill because they’ve been around long enough to know how to survive. When considering wildlife management, we have to focus on populations, not individual animals.


I’m not trying to mansplain your feelings away, btw. I’m just offering a perspective from a hunter who deeply cares about conservation and the preservation of wildlife. I pay lots of money well beyond tag and license fees to do my part in funding wildlife and habitat conservation. I write my representatives to implore then to support conservation legislation. There are thousands more who are much more deeply involved than I am. I don’t think I’ll ever go on one of these exotic hunts (One time I sunk almost $5k into an African safari trip, only to walk away after reading more about it and deciding it wasn’t my style) Of course there are shitty people everywhere you go and in every corner you could look. But someone paying money to hunt an animal that had been identified by conservation directors as eligible to be culled without negative impact to the herd, and having the fees go toward further conservation efforts is to me a net positive.
Click to expand...

no offense (and i mean that sincerely as you sound like a thoughtful guy), but keep in mind, the subject is trophy hunting, and in this example, of a rare and endangered species - so what is it in your heart that makes you prefer to see a rare and glorious living creature dead than alive? i mean, if you were a trophy hunter of a rare and endangered species, at the point you aim, and in that split second before you pull the trigger and take that life - what are you thinking? what is the death of that rare creature worth to you? a moment of glory? a grisly photograph? grab a beer afterwards?

and WRT caring deeply about conservation - to what end? increasing the numbers of endangered species so more can be killed? it’s a tired arguement. you get that there are other ways to conserve our natural heritage without killing it, right?
 
Last edited:
That rhino in the cartoon video above was actually a true story. Someone paid over 350k to hunt a grumpy old unbreadable bull that killed other breeding males and females from exhaustion of trying to mate with them. That money went back in. Probably worth a Google
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top